Talk:Robert Delpire

Niggles

This is excellent work (far better than fr:Robert Delpire). Well done, Lopifalko! However . . .

• It doesn't seem to offer a source for the claim that he was born in 1926 (while the French article doesn't seem to offer one for the claim that he was born two years later).
• "Delpire & Co." or "Delpire & Cie."? (Yes, imaginably the one in some contexts and the other in others.)
• Sometimes it's not clear whether an English title is an actual English title or a nonce translation into English of a French title.
• Sometimes it's not clear whether the French- and English-language editions are both being discussed (eg was awarded this or that prize), or only the former. (Offhand, I don't know if Delpire ever published in English. But I think that a number of the English-language editions, being largely the same, were printed together with the French ones. If I'm right, then effectively the design of the English-language edition, even if published by Thames & Hudson or wherever, would have been Delpire's.)

-- Hoary (talk) 00:34, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Hoary. And thank you for your expert copy editing, it's most welcome. I thought I was learning to be able to turn these things in without requiring as many of your tweaks as I once did. I'm surprised that the French article is so sparse; but then there wasn't even an English article at all until now, so...

I've dealt with his his year of birth, sourcing it to Delpire's biography at delpire.com, and altered the French article (interestingly, his French biography doesn't mention his year of birth, yet his English biography does). Lopifalko (talk) 08:10, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

No, you're doing well. Yes, I do more tweaking to your prose than you do to mine; but the reason for this is simple: I produce much less than you do. When I do produce something, you and others quickly come along to improve it. -- Hoary (talk) 10:44, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

My alteration of his year of birth on the French Wikipedia was reverted, with a claim that delpire.com was in error, but without another ref to back up that claim. My understanding is that Wikipedia should defer to the author's own claim unless there is more compelling evidence coming from elsewhere, but I haven't the French language skills to debate that over there. -Lopifalko (talk) 08:20, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

• Citroën Furgoneta – "Is "furgoneta" not just the Spanish word for van?" – I thought so, but I also thought it the actual model name. I think you are probably right.
• I used English translations in the lead section so as to keep the lead section more succinct, less clogged up with nomenclature. Perhaps I shouldn't take such a liberty.

-Lopifalko (talk) 10:48, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes, but I believe that Les Américains is different from The Americans, and not just in the language of the text that fills certain rectangles on the printed pages. And offhand I don't know about the relationship between the French- and the English-language first editions of Koudelka's book.

In general I'm happy to err toward precision, even if the result looks pernickety or pedantic: I don't want to confuse the reader, but I think that being aware that you're confused (with the conscious option of reading a little further in an effort to cut through the confusion) is better than being misled and wrongly confident that you understand. -- Hoary (talk) 12:24, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. And yes, of-course, it's obvious now we're talking about it, Les Américains (1958) is a distinctly different work to The Americans (1959). Or so I'm told, sadly not having a copy of Les Américains in my possession. -Lopifalko (talk) 10:51, 21 September 2015 (UTC)